By a vote of 48 – 0, because who wants to vote against Christmas?, the Senate passed SB 326. The bill permits school corporations to instruct students about the history of traditional winter celebrations and will also allow students and employees to offer “traditional greetings” such as “Merry Christmas,” “Happy Holidays,” and “Happy Hanukkah.”
The bill also purports to allow school corporations to display “scenes or symbols” associated with “traditional” winter celebrations such as a Menorah, Christmas Tree, or Nativity Scene. No word on scenes or symbols associated with Saturnalia, Festivus, or other winter festivals which are undoubtedly part of somebody’s tradition. However, the use can’t include just one religious symbol – it has to include either more than one religious symbol or a religious symbol and a secular scene or symbol. Presumably a devotional to Jesus is acceptable in a kindergarten class if there is a Santa Claus or Christmas tree laying about somewhere nearby.
As far as I can tell, this bill is useless. If there is a prohibition on these sorts of activities (and for the most part I don’t think there is in the first place), that prohibition is imposed by the U.S. Constitution. The General Assembly can’t do a thing about restrictions imposed by the Constitution. More likely is that this legislation would tend to encourage school corporations to violate the Constitution in reliance on the statute; thereby incurring unnecessary legal fees.
It also tends to reinforce the persecution complex of those who believe the hype about the “War on Christmas.” If the General Assembly had to step in to protect Christmas, things must have been serious! At the end of the day, it feels like a manifestation of cultural panic by those who perceive that the culture is changing and don’t like the change.
Legally, I don’t see that this legislation does any particular damage, but I guess I regard its passage as symbolically questionable.
I can’t wait for children to start learning how Santa was modeled from the god Odin during the Christianization of Germanic Europe.
So, the other day, my daughter asked about her school mascot, “The Crusaders.” I said, “let’s go to the map!” (Because I’m a geek, and I just got a world map for Christmas this year.) So, I showed her the Pope in Rome, and the general location of the Western Church at the time of the crusades. Then I showed her Jerusalem and explained that the Jewish people had been in and around Jerusalem for a long time and had the Temple there, that Jesus had been Jewish and did a lot of his teaching in and around Jerusalem and was killed there, and that the Muslims believed Mohammed had gone up to heaven from a spot in Jerusalem. (Then I had to explain who the Muslims were because my daughter was unfamiliar).
She stopped me and asked “how do you know so much about religion?” I told her that a lot of history was, essentially, the history of religion. That being the case, there is no practical need for schools to have a protected right to teach the history of winter celebrations. They can (or should) teach all kinds of other aspects of religious history already.
My daughter’s school nickname is the Cougars. This from a religious school founded in the last 10 years.
I still don’t understand how no one caught it.
“Then I showed her Jerusalem and explained that the Jewish people had been in and around Jerusalem for a long time”
Not really. That’s a 19th-20th Century narrative. “Jewish” is also a very modern word. The Romans drove the Hebrews out of the Levant in the second century A.D. From 135 until 1948, even after Balfour, very few Israelites lived in the Levant, and the land was known as Palestine. “Palestine” means “Philistine.” Remember them from your Bible? They ran that area, and the Israelites didn’t like it, so they wrote a nasty treatment into the Old Testament.
Same deal with Baal, who was the god of another group that pushed the Hebrews around. The Hebrews got out the papyrus and turned Baal into Beelzebub, “God of Flies.” If I write that Massonians are Lafayette mud-dwellers who eat grubs and mosquito larvae, centuries from now, with people divorced from context, your name might be an insult.
At the time of the Crusades, almost no Talmudists lived in the Levant.
It’s amazing what “history” has been created out of thin air with a few pen strokes. Real historians know that so much of the Old Testament is self-serving propaganda, but seemingly intelligent people such as you still persist in repeating inaccurate narratives to new generations.
Odd that you’re ordinarily rather hostile to religion, but you unquestioningly accept arguably the primary purpose why the Old Testament was created. It was not primarily a spiritual treatise. You may have no use for the doctrinal points, but as long as you think and repeat that Jews are from Israel, you’re of tremendous use to the Neocons, Republicans and the War Lobby.
“and had the Temple there,”
Sounds nice, but it’s not true. The Second Temple was built by the Romans as a gift to its colony. There is no historical evidence or artifact from or proving the “First Temple.” It may have existed elsewhere, perhaps, but there’s no proof that it ever existed on Temple Mount.
Might want to have another talk with the kid.
Someone has to write book about the crazy bills proposed by Indiana legislators and what they say about the willful ignorance and arrogance of those people. About 20 or 30 short chapters, each one highlighting one proposed bill, why it was so silly and something about the motivations that led to its writing would do it. Sort of a “Darwin Awards” publication. That sucker would sell!
I fear that would require several volumes.
Even better! Publish the annual yearbook and move to Denmark, where they live the American dream.
A school district near me actually was an early front line for the War on Christmas, because a Muslim mother wanted to put one Eid ul Fitr (holiday for the end of Ramadan) symbol by all the Christmas stuff — so the principal reacted by ordering no holidays marked at all. (The school board overturned that.)
http://chicagoist.com/2007/10/04/the_school_boar.php
Funny thing is, the mother had no objections to the Christmas symbols. In fact, I’ve noticed at elementary school winter programs (which are pretty damned nakedly Christmasy), it’s the mothers in hijabs who seem to be the most enthusiastic about taking pictures of their kids in the show.
So I eagerly look forward to Indiana legislators’ warm embrace of Eid ul Fitr symbols at school. Don’t worry, legislators — Eid has gotten earlier and earlier over the past few years, so it’s not close to Christmas.
When my daughter’s second grade teacher insisted on telling her class to pray in the morning in the way that would be comfortable to them, I suggested to my daughter that she put a doll on her desk and dance around it. That would have put an end to the “prayer in school” initiative, and much cheaper and more effective than calling an attorney. People need to think carefully before they insist on the right of others to celebrate their religion in a public school. A Muslim (or whatever) may do just that.
“A holiday status identical or substantially similar to Christmas shall be valid and recognized.” Now if we can only put that back behind the first sentence, whatever that was when we figure out the proper committee.
If the United States Supreme Court is so hostile to the freedoms and the honored traditions of America, such that legislatures must enact laws to protect their residents from the federal government, the stresses to the union are great.
#1 The Supreme Court isn’t hostile to the “freedoms and honored traditions of America.” (Glad to see the modifier “America” for the traditions you reference — the General Assembly should have been as clear when it uses the word “traditional”.)
#2 The Supremacy Clause makes the states subordinate in this regard. Any doubt on that score was settled at Appomattox when the Southern treason in defense of slavery was put down.
So you think you’ve settled a philosophical argument with guns? Well, Son, that’s just fine by me. See, we’ve got lots more time and lots more guns, and I’m not sure what y’all are going to do for food while the question is again being “discussed,” since all the arable ground is inhabited by folks who disagree with you.
You’re awfully tough. I’m very impressed.
And one more thing, if the boys in the blue knew what you were planning to do with their blood, they would have laid down their arms and left the field. The did not fight for you or your anti-freedom agenda. Irish immigrants did not fight and die so urban liberals could attack Christmas and force “homosexual” marriage on the country, amongst other sins.
We own a pretty good piece of arable ground, and we think he makes a lot of sense.
You strike me as the sort of person who didn’t realize that Dr. Strangelove was a parody until after 15 or 20 viewings.
Apparently, the cool thing to do is to name yourself after something you hate.
I don’t understand why some people want more government in their religious practices. They have the freedom to worship however they choose on their own property, like everyone else.
If the Founders had the desire to place Christian traditions into the US Constitution, they would have done so. Perhaps their grasp of the history of Europe – with wars fought about religion – led them to write a document that kept government and religion apart.
Worked out pretty well, no?
Mostly with these sorts of efforts, it seems like an effort to mark territory. “It’s *our* government.”
I figure it’s fear of changing times and a loss of influence of religion.
One way to respond to that is to ask the government for help with secular laws. Which is ironic, but let’s not go there right now.
Another way would be to, I dunno, serve others like Jesus instructed in The Bible? And perhaps people would be more interested in what religious types have to say about social issues if they were being remarkable advocates for the poor and less fortunate.
But what do I know, other than it sure seems like the current approach isn’t working?
Traditionally and historically, the Christian Faith has been much more concerned about justice, the poor and establishing positive and caring relationships. If you read the prophets (e.g., Amos, Isaiah), they don’t focus on those issues, and you won’t find much about “God, guns and guts”, grabbing what’s yours or fear that the general population isn’t celebrating holy days. I guess they didn’t watch Fox News.
Oops. The prophets DO focus on justice, the poor and establishing positive and caring relationships.
Joe, I think that history shows that by the late 1700s, they had “worn that shirt”–of religion in government–and decided that they had had enough of it. Now there’s a novel idea: learning from experience!
Marking territory, yes, in that they’re pissing all over people as they “take back our country.”
Whoops, Joe. You have to set your argument up the right way. Your argument failed because you ignored that the public square is “their own property.”
It took over a day to reach and come up with a response, and in doing so all you could do is post something in direct conflict to the private property rights arguments you’ve made previously in these parts.
Yet I should take advice from you on how to structure an argument. Right.
Silence would have been the better option there, bub. You’re making Eric Miller seems like a reasonable person with your nonsense.